The Shipping Glut Is So Bad Globally That Ships Are Now Sailing Slower Than 19th Century Clippers Just To Keep Busyhttp://www.businessinsider.com/the-shipping-glut-is-so-bad-globally-that-ships-are-now-sailing-slower-than-19th-century-clippers-just-to-keep-busy-2010-10/comments
en-usWed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 -0500Sun, 02 Aug 2015 19:14:05 -0400Vincent Fernando, CFAhttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccf6c6a49e2aebd63090000JackvMon, 01 Nov 2010 21:42:02 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccf6c6a49e2aebd63090000
Wrong analysis. In a strong business climate, the ships operate as fast as possible in order to collect the freight and move on to the next charter(contract of afreightment). There is no economic incentive to operate a vessel at slow speed. "Parking" the vessel does not save money as they still have to pay the debt on the note to the bank and also pay a fee to "park" the vessel in a fleet and pay for the crew to man her and the fuel to run the diesel generators to maintain electric power. Ships, like cars, do not respond well to extended periods of idleness.
Sorry, that is the reality of running ocean vessels.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cceff1f4bd7c8023e020000John GaltMon, 01 Nov 2010 13:55:42 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cceff1f4bd7c8023e020000
In addition to Tim's point, Cutty Sark and other extreme clippers were not "average" cargo vessels of the time, as containerships are. Cutty Sark and other extreme clippers were built for a specific purpose - to get tea from China before any other ship (premium prices were paid for the first shipment).
Comparing the two is like comparing the Concorde to the average Boeing or Airbus and noting that "airliners travel at less than half the speed they did in the early 1970s" - technically true but misleading and useless.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccef848ccd1d5ae750f0000warlordMon, 01 Nov 2010 13:26:32 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccef848ccd1d5ae750f0000
Who owns most of those container ships? You can bet they are not American owned.
If they were, under our current foreign policy, we would be slowing down, to let the
Somali's catch up.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccee8dd49e2ae0f07050000ADMon, 01 Nov 2010 12:20:45 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccee8dd49e2ae0f07050000
On that 360-mile day, I would assume that Cutty Sark was in a fierce storm the entire time. The sailing-masters of the day would seek out bad weather, for bad weather meant high winds, and high winds meant speed, which also meant men lost over the side falling from the rigging, or being washed over the rail from having the decks awash. It was not a day's pleasant sail on Narragansett Sound.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccedbaccadcbb902e010000Jim,MtnViewCA,USAMon, 01 Nov 2010 11:24:28 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccedbaccadcbb902e010000
Sure, they should keep the ships moving instead of moth-balling them.
Because there might be a V-shaped recovery!
Any day now....http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cced2f849e2ae3061090000iconoclastMon, 01 Nov 2010 10:47:20 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cced2f849e2ae3061090000
Given the obvious brain damage Fred suffers from, I would venture to guess that meth is his drug of choice.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccec5954bd7c82f31120000noneMon, 01 Nov 2010 09:50:12 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccec5954bd7c82f31120000
One more aspect is that with low interest rates, the inventory cost of going slower is much lower as well.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccec142cadcbb7229030000id8Mon, 01 Nov 2010 09:31:46 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccec142cadcbb7229030000
This is a neat twist on a now old story.
"cargo ship parking lot".
http://exportlogisticsguide.com/cargo-vessels-sit-idle-in-singapore/
FredZZ, you should have said "Bush's fault".
You may go back to sleep now.
***
Headline gripe:
There is glut of ships, not a glut of shipping.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccebff0ccd1d51b6a0b0000HarunMon, 01 Nov 2010 09:26:08 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccebff0ccd1d51b6a0b0000
You might slow the ships down if you thought there could be a sudden spike in demand. Laying off ships, etc., might not be a good idea if you would have to scramble to re-man them quickly.
If sea cargo was booming, you would certainly run them faster, even at more cost, because you could pass that on to the customer and you would need all your capacity.
If sea cargo demand was weak, but your customers still demanded a full schedule, and you had to keep your costs down due to competition, the slowing them down might make sense, too.
Its hard to tell what is happening.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccebcf1ccd1d5236a030000Rich CookMon, 01 Nov 2010 09:13:21 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccebcf1ccd1d5236a030000
Step away from the crack pipe Fred.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cceb903cadcbbbb270a0000TheRandomTexanMon, 01 Nov 2010 08:56:35 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cceb903cadcbbbb270a0000
"...or else it would have made more sense to park the ships..'
Ah, but <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1212013/Revealed-The-ghost-fleet-recession-anchored-just-east-Singapore.html">that's happening too! </a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cce0cfb4bd7c89115070000FredZZSun, 31 Oct 2010 20:42:35 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4cce0cfb4bd7c89115070000
This is obviously just a Republican lie. You moronic simpletons will just believe anything won't you? Lie, lie, lie. None of this is true, it is only Republican talking points.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccded77cadcbb0308370000microhouseholdSun, 31 Oct 2010 18:28:07 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccded77cadcbb0308370000
@Nick
@اخبار
Agreed.
Cargo like flowers go by air.
Other Cargo can go slower.
Guardian wrote this a while ago:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jul/25/slow-ships-cut-greenhouse-emissions
I guess it mainly done to save costs.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccddde24bd7c8720d390000aaronSun, 31 Oct 2010 17:21:38 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccddde24bd7c8720d390000
That's sounds like bull propaganda!
Cnbs style!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccdd13dcadcbbd905010000اخبارSun, 31 Oct 2010 16:27:41 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccdd13dcadcbbd905010000
Slower speed is more fuel efficient and better for ships in term
<a href="http://www.aldeerah-news.com">اخبار</a>
of wear and tear and maintenance costs. And that's
<a href="http://www.aldeerah-news.com">اخبار اليوم</a>
probably why it makes sense to operate more ships at slower speeds.
<a href="http://www.aldeerah-news.com">وظائف حكومية</a>
Or else it would've made more sense to park the extra ships,
<a href="http://www.aldeerah-news.com">صحيفة سبق</a>
lay off their crews. And use the
<a href="http://www.aldeerah-news.com">صحيفة الرياض</a>
rest at fast speeds.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccdc8b4ccd1d5b33f0e0000christopherSun, 31 Oct 2010 15:51:16 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccdc8b4ccd1d5b33f0e0000
containers going out of west coast ports are up..........only problem many are empty?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccdbbb749e2ae4d351c0000tim mSun, 31 Oct 2010 14:55:51 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccdbbb749e2ae4d351c0000
Another lame, even crappy Business Insider article. The Cutty Sark, one of a few dozen extreme clippers, whose economic life lasted very briefly, made 9 or 10 knots as a average speed on that 67 day passage. To quote the one record day and than blare in the usual BS Business Insider headline fashion that ships today, going 15 knots, are going slower is worthless journalism.
Get with it Henry, maybe you need some people old enough to have a little sense.
tim mhttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccdbabfccd1d58f3d060000RobtSun, 31 Oct 2010 14:51:43 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccdbabfccd1d58f3d060000
I think the Cutty Sark may have been built before 1969 (!)
It was 1869http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccda27849e2ae160c280000NickSun, 31 Oct 2010 13:08:07 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4ccda27849e2ae160c280000
Slower speed is more fuel efficient and better for ships in term of wear and tear and maintenance costs. And that's probably why it makes sense to operate more ships at slower speeds.
Or else it would've made more sense to park the extra ships, lay off their crews. And use the rest at fast speeds.